2 Peter authentic?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

RALPH NIELSEN
This is from the notes to 2 Peter in the New Jerusalem Bible (Regular
edition), an excellent British Catholic translation, eg., it says Yahweh
instead of LORD. I quote from p. 1995:

... there is no sure evidence that the letter was accepted at all before
the third century, and some, according to Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome,
explicitly refused to accept it. Most critics nowadays also reject the
Petrine authorship.... This is what we should call FORGERY [my caps], but
the ancients had different conventions about authorship and pseudonymity.

LARSON
Hi Ralph!  I have the NJB in paperback but not in a Study Bible/footnote
commentary format.  In fact, I've been selling off my "theological library"
over the past few weeks just to lighten the load a bit.  I am surprised at
the nonexistent response coming from Christian participants on this list
pertaining to my post on 2 Peter 2:4.  I'm not as articulate as Farrell, but
the silence must indicate agreement, so I must have proven my case.  Thanks
for sharing the NJB info with me--the post is saved!

Sincerely,

Doug Larson

• Previous message: 2 Peter authentic?
• Next message: 2 Peter authentic?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]